Post Edited (Goriller) : 8/29/2005 11:51:12 AM (GMT-5)

Post Edited (jefscott) : 8/29/2005 10:33:08 PM (GMT-5)

Gorillar,

I have looked at the debate, too.  I believe Lammerson is going to have to discuss the Isaiah 40-48 section at some time.  As Bob points out this is usually appealed to as one of the strongest sections for the "Settled View."  As an Open Theist, I think Lammerson is in serious trouble here.  I have debated local Calvinists with this secton and they usually are silenced in their (1) interpretation of the material and (2) their critique of Open Theistic interpretation of the same material. 

I know Bob can handle himself quite ably.  I know him and met with him several times, as he visited a mutual friend here in Michigan.  I don't always agree with him on certain verses, but on his general presentation, I most certainly do.  Lammerson is in some serious trouble and I don't think he understands how serious his position is.  Most Calvinists think they can walk all over an OTer in a discussion.  But I've seen and heard Bob at work here against a Calvinist friend of mine, as well as debated Calvinists myself.

They see OT as a more serious threat than traditional Arminianism because OT is a logical and tight system, as is Reformed theology.  Traditional Arminianism has too many problems and they know it, but they accept them as believers--a little off the mark--but still believers.  Their response to OT is far different, however.  They understand the seriousness of their problem and view it as the most dangerous thing to Reformed dogma.  This is why most are willing to condemn it and believe OTer's are heretical.  Local Calvinists here in Michigan have tried to label the OT group I'm a part of as heretical.

Robert Furney

A couple of other things about Psalm 139:16:

1.  Ps 139:16 Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there was not one of them. (NASB)

This qualifies “days”.  So, sure, God could have pre-ordained some things for David to do, just as God had declared that Solomon would be the one to re-build the temple.  But it doesn’t follow that all the days of David’s life were pre-ordained.

2.  This Psalm seems to apply to David.  It doesn’t follow that this applies to us as well.

Revelation verses about the Book of Life:

There are other passages that show that names can be erased or blotted out from the Book of Life (Ps 69:28, Rev 3:5).  So the question is, how do we reconcile the passages Lee quoted with the blotting out of names?  The blotting out seems to show that what’s written in the Book of Life can be changed.  I’ll think about that later.  Gotta go.

(PS- John, the Hebrew text that I have does have the word “yomim” which means days or periods of time.  I’m not sure why the KJV has “members” but they translated “yomim” as “continuance” in my interlinear Bible   There's nothing that I've found that supports that specific translation of that passage.)

Violin for God said...
God could have pre-ordained some things for David to do, just as God had declared that Solomon would be the one to re-build the temple. But it doesn’t follow that all the days of David’s life were pre-ordained.

Lee: Doesn't "all the days formed for me" refer more to periods of time, though? And all of that period of time, throughout the Psalmist's life? You seem to be reading this like "the deeds ordained for me" instead, which is somewhat different.

VFG:  It could mean periods of time (or it could mean days) within the Psalmist’s life.  Either way, this doesn’t change the conclusion I presented.  We can’t ignore or omit the qualifying clause after “yomin”  and it seems that you’re doing that in your conclusion. This qualifier can either mean 1) all of the days of David’s life if all the days of his life were already ordained before he was conceived in the womb or 2) this refers to a set of days within David’s life and all the days within this group were already ordained by God for him.  Thus you can’t conclusively say it is 1) or 2).

One other important thing: you write “and all of that period of time”.  This is an incorrect interpretation of “yomin”.  “yom” is singular masculine, “yomin” is plural masculine.  It would be correct to state “and all those periods of time.” 

Also, I’m not reading “deeds” or anything else into the passage. You already saw how I interpret “yomin” from another post. Of course, during days (or periods of time) deeds are performed, but this doesn’t mean I interpret “yomin” to specifically mean the word “deeds”.

Violin for God said...
This Psalm seems to apply to David. It doesn’t follow that this applies to us as well.

Lee: Well, then do we have to say verses 7 and 8 do not teach omnipresence?

VFG: Sure, we can learn about who God is from these passages (which include information about His necessary attributes).  But let me try to make my point a bit clearer: just because there were days (or periods) within David’s life that were already ordained, we can’t just automatically say that it must be the case that some of the days (or periods) in our lives were pre-ordained as well.  Some of our days might or might not have been ordained.  But we can’t conclude either way with absolute certainty from this verse.

Violin for God said...
The blotting out seems to show that what’s written in the Book of Life can be changed.

Lee: Yes, but Revelation doesn't say "all those whose names have not been blotted out," rather, those who have not been written. But I do believe God can write people's names in again! Though that is another topic.

But at least this speaks of God's foreknowledge, of people not repenting.

VFG: True.  I agree with this part.  No disputes here!

Post Edited (JEE) : 9/18/2005 4:08:39 AM (GMT-5)

Hey Lee,

Lee: Yes, and then we must try and see which is most probable. Since "days" is more general than "deeds," I would tend to think the time period interpretation is more probable, since it would be unlikely that God would ordain simply certain days, rather this seems more likely to indicate the span of his life, including what would happen in that (ordained) time.

VFG: The part that I underlined in your quote, why is it unlikely?  I think it’s highly likely.  He could ordain days as easily as he could ordain periods of time.  I think my interpretation of “days” is more probable than your interpretation of “a single period of time” as I will explain in the next reply below.  Tell me based on something from the Hebrew text in Psalm 139:16 that shows that your interpretation is more likely.

Lee: Well, I treat it as a collective noun, i.e. that all these days are being considered as a single object, as in "all my words, you know them," "all my thoughts, you know them," "all my days were written."

VFG: Why do you treat it as a collective noun?  I don’t know much Hebrew at all, so if there’s something I’m missing, please let me know.  But are there other passages where Hebrew writers and scholars treat a plural noun as a collective singular noun (ie, interpreting a plural to be a singular)?  If there is no support for treating it as a collective noun, then I’d say we’re left to interpreting “yomim” as “days” or “periods of time” in this verse, unless there’s another supportable interpretation for this.

Lee: Agreed again! Then what is most probable? Does this passage seem to be intended for us to apply it to ourselves? Have interpreters typically taken this passage in that way?

VFG:  I read a couple of commentaries on this verse (Matthew Henry, Barnes’ Notes, Adam Clarke’s, Jamieson et al., Kiel & Delitzsch, and Geneva Notes) and the results vary.  Anyway, I haven’t said that this verse doesn’t apply to us, but I simply took the position that we shouldn't take the position that it must apply to us.  And I agree, sure, some of our days were probably ordained by God, such as when we are to be born, if there's a neighborhood kid for us to meet, or perhaps He fore-ordained us to use our gifts He gave for some purpose that He'd bring about when the time is right.  For example with me, God gave me musical talent, and now He’s opened up plenty of opportunities for me to use it for Him.  Sure, that could have been fore-ordained when I was conceived, but I can’t be absolutely certain whether or not they really were fore-ordained.

Post Edited (Lee Merrill) : 9/21/2005 11:10:17 PM (GMT-5)